Posted on 06/26/2015 7:04:37 AM PDT by Coronal
Court upholds same sex marriage in 5-4 ruling. Majority is Kennedy, Breyer, Bader-Ginsburg, Kagan & Sotomayor. Scalia, Thomas, Alito & Roberts dissent.
And our Representation doesn’t represent us. It’s the trifecta from Hell.
The Tenth has been dead for over a century. The First joins this week, if you are of the opinion that somehow the federal Government now allocates inalienable rights.
Personally, I’m not aware of God abdicating his position recently, or investing His moral authority in any temporal vessel.
Obviously there is a very serious problem here that can never be resolved though good faith and mutual acceptance of the binding principles. The Left has no respect for either. We as a nation need to come to terms with that reality and act accordingly in our own self interests.
100% truth. In some ways your ability to compete and thrive will be determined by how well you play against cheaters.
...pedophilia.
Oh, that’s already in the works, FRiend. Look up ASFAR, Americans ffor a Society Free From Age Restrictions. Also known as ASFAR Youth Liberation. They’re lobbying our congress creeps, lawyers, and judges as we speak.
Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
Agreed.
And like I said yesterday, Kennedy wrote this nightmare.
I’m certainly not going to give liberals the satisfaction of being discouraged by it at all.
Oh they have to be after this decision.
It was only a matter of time before it was legal in each state anyway.
As Christians we will continue to deal with this as we do any sin. Abortion, adultery, alcoholism all legal. But we love the sinner, point them to Christ and His forgiveness and change hearts and minds through the power of the Lord. A people and a society can be changed.
Pray for a great awakening. The gates of hell shall not prevail.
I am sure he pulled the same thing many Senators do when they no something is going to pass, they vote against is and say “see! I voted against it!”
uh huh.
Agreed. SCOTUS will never be Conservative again (if it ever was)
Oh I’m not discouraged, because Jesus said when we see these things come to pass, to lift up our heads for our redemption draws nigh.
Robert Bork was right all those many years ago. W was wrong when he said “I don’t think we are slouching toward Gomorrah...” We are Gomorrah. Back then it was slouching. We have now arrived.
Disobey God or else!
They can only overturn it via Constitutional Amendment. Veto Power doesn’t apply
No. I don’t.
But I’d miss a Conservative if we ever actually nominate one.
Sadly, the rage, I mean REAL rage, is confined to a small group. Support of this kind of “marriage” is skyrocketing. Then there are people who care about nothing.
We are a dying breed my friend. It’s times like this I am glad I am old. We can all hang out on the Other Side in a better existence.
Yep....America’s final turn from our Maker. May He show mercy to His believers.
N.B. This makes the US an even bigger target for terrorism. Islamic fundamentalists abominate homosexuality. This ruling makes the USA look like Queerdom-central. A provocation like this, the Achmeds of the world won’t ignore.
from Thomas’ dissent
The majority’s decision today will require States to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples and to recognize same-sex marriages entered in other States largely based on a constitutional provision guaranteeing “due process” before a person is deprived of his “life, liberty, or property.” I have elsewhere explained the dangerous fiction of treating the Due Process Clause as a font of substantive rights. McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, 811–812 (2010) (THOMAS, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment). It distorts the constitutional text, which guarantees only whatever “process” is “due” before a person is deprived of life, liberty, and property. U. S. Const., Amdt. 14, §1. Worse, it invites judges to do exactly what the majority has done here—“‘roa[m] at large in the constitutional field’ guided only by their personal views” as to the “‘fundamental rights’” protected by that document. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U. S. 833, 953, 965 (1992) (Rehnquist, C. J., concurring in judgment in part and dissenting in part) (quoting Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479, 502 (1965) (Harlan, J.,concurring in judgment)).
By straying from the text of the Constitution, substantive due process exalts judges at the expense of the People from whom they derive their authority. Petitioners argue that by enshrining the traditional definition of marriage in their State Constitutions through voter-approved amendments, the States have put the issue “beyond the reach of the normal democratic process.” Brief for Petitioners in No. 14–562, p. 54. But the result petitioners seek is far less democratic. They ask nine judges on this Court to enshrine their definition of marriage in the Federal Constitution and thus put it beyond the reach of the normal democratic process for the entire Nation. That a “bare majority” of this Court, ante, at 25, is able to grant this wish, wiping out with a stroke of the keyboard the results of the political process in over 30 States, based on a provision that guarantees only “due process” is but further evidence of the danger of substantive due process.
So, all companies required to grant ‘same sex domestic partner’ benefits can cancel those immediately, right?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.